SEXUAL HARRASSMENT?

by Ruth A. Sheets

Sexual harassment has come to the fore this year, probably at least partially because the current occupant of the White House has credibly been accused of and has admitted acts of sexual harassment.

Individuals and groups are rushing to jump on a sexual harassment policy bandwagon.  The noise and pseudo-excitement is sweeping up a lot of people, many of whom have made comments or have touched someone in a way the touchee did not want or appreciate.  Often these take place between people whose level of power vary greatly or where one of the people has at least some level of control over the other person's livelihood.

It seems to me any sexual harassment policy MUST take into account levels of harassment.  Touching someone does not automatically mean sexual harassment.  Making comments that are "off-color" does not necessarily mean sexual harassment.  I am so sick of people "coming forward" with claims for things that can happen in ordinary conversation, particularly with someone who is generally demonstrative.  One act like this does not a sexual harasser make.  However, repeated such acts, that's a different story.

The process should begin with training in this area for everyone.  Then, there must be a graduated level of types of harassment from infrequent unwanted comments to  touching in a "Sexual" manner to lack of promotions for women unless they succumb to advances, to actual rape or assault.

Lately, though Democrats are acting as though all sexual harassment is the same.  No matter what the act, it requires the "perpetrator" to resign in disgrace.  This is absurd!  A casual touch, a comment in passing, touching the thigh of someone sitting next to one in the excitement of a stimulating conversation  don't come close to demanding sexual favors for promotions, career opportunities, money, or any other material or other gain.  And, they are not even in the same league with rape or attempted rape.

It is exciting that this issue has resurfaced for the general public.  It was out there in 1991 with the Clarence Thomas Supreme Court hearings when Anita Hill came forward to report an ongoing pattern of harassment on the part of a man who would be sitting on our nation's highest court.  She was only believed by women who had experienced the same kind of harassment.   Even many of them thought this was just the way of life and should not have been brought up.  Thomas was voted into the position he still holds more than a quarter of a century later.

It would be great if the current movement were to stay front and center, but people are already getting fed up with it, and I mean women, not just the men who keep the sexual harassment going.

Most people recognize the differences in levels of harassment and, like me, don't want legislators, particularly Democrats to rush to "do something, anything."  Sometimes when Democrats acknowledge a problem, they jump on it with both feet and want to immediately purge the problem and all perpetrators from their ranks, like some kind of religious mission.  In an undemocratic manner, they drive out people who do care and could learn and practice more appropriate actions in their lives.  Heck, the accusations have only been in the public court, not in the "real" courts or even before any kind of board that can help everyone work through what actually happened.

The need to work through what happened is essential if we are to have any kind of uniform understanding of the levels of sexual harassment.  How did a particular situation arise?  Are there political or other reasons an accusation was made?  Is what happened actually a crime?  Have apologies been made and accepted?  Will either party have to be in a working or social situation again?  Is the harassment a pattern or a one-time thing?  What can other women (or men) do to recognize when what is happening to them is sexual harassment?  Are there ways to avoid the situation? 

Without transparency, sexual harassment becomes a "she said, he said" situation and the victims don't get the full story out and the accused does not get to either explain or defend his/her position. 

Clearly some sexual harassment is a crime and needs to be addressed through our judicial system.  rape, attempted rape, assault, pedophilia, threats, and other acts are truly crimes already on the books.  What a good policy can do is address in a fair way the "lesser" acts.  What is a realistic response by an organization, by persons within that organization?  Should there be laws regarding specific acts described as sexual harassment?  What steps need to be followed to see that accuser and accused are heard?  How should issues of power in relationships related to harassment be addressed?  What kind of training in the workplace and other sites actually improves conditions?  These are all important considerations and will take time if we are to make effective sexual harassment policy.

Democrats MUST be involved in the process, but not pretend that driving their representatives out of office without some kind of due process is OK.  It isn't.  Dems must stop playing "holier than thou.  Republicans and Independents are just as involved in harassing, perhaps even more.  So, when Dems try one of their own in the court of public opinion, with no formal means of explaining, They are enabling the public to think it is only Democrats who are sexual harassers.  That is simply foolish and shows Democrats feeding on their own and gives Republicans victories they don't deserve.